Next Article in Journal
The Novel “On Call: A Report on the Epidemic” by Hans Erich Nossack from 1973: A Dystrophic World Similar to the Coronavirus Pandemic Almost 50 Years Later
Previous Article in Journal
Pharmacological Profiles and Recovery Predictors in Severe COVID-19
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
COVID
Volume 6
Issue 6
10.3390/covid6060104
covid-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Systematic Review

COVID-19 and Global Agriculture: Impacts on Food Security, Supply Chains and Agricultural Resilience

by
Sajjad Hussain
1,*,
Muhammad Mubeen
2,
Saeed Ahmad Qaisrani
1,
Shah Fahad
3,
Muhammad Suffian
4,
Muhammad Tahir
2,
Hafiz Muhammad Rashad Javeed
1 and
Wajid Nasim
5,*
1
Department of Environmental Sciences, COMSATS University Islamabad, Vehari Campus, Vehari 61100, Pakistan
2
Department of Biotechnology, COMSATS University Islamabad, Vehari Campus, Vehari 61100, Pakistan
3
Department of Agronomy, Abdul Wali Khan University Mardan, Mardan 23200, Pakistan
4
Institute of Biochemistry, Biotechnology & Bioinformatics, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur (IUB), Bahawalpur 63100, Pakistan
5
Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture and Environment, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur (IUB), Bahawalpur 63100, Pakistan
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
COVID 2026, 6(6), 104; https://doi.org/10.3390/covid6060104
Submission received: 15 May 2026 / Revised: 11 June 2026 / Accepted: 12 June 2026 / Published: 14 June 2026
(This article belongs to the Section COVID Public Health and Epidemiology)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

The world has already been facing food, nutrition, and security challenges for the last few decades. The coronavirus 2019, COVID-19, has a significant impact on food security and agriculture, such as affecting food demand and the food supply chain, with the greatest consequences on the most vulnerable population. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the effects of COVID-19 on global agriculture and food security, drawing on recent scientific publications, institutional reports, and policy documents from 2020 to 2026. The review examines the impact of the pandemic on cropping patterns, fruit and vegetable harvests, availability of farm inputs, connectivity of the agricultural system, food supply chains, food demand, and labor availability. Vegetable and fruit markets were most affected due to the spread of COVID-19. Due to the closing of markets and restaurants, produce distributors and farmers were required to transfer supplies entirely from the food production to the marketplace. These effects are additionally being felt in agriculture and food security. Almost 55% of researchers indicated that COVID-19 has the most impact on agriculture and its complete harvest during the season, and an additional 45% stated that COVID-19 has adversely affected food security. However, food has slowed down well to date in numerous nations. The spread of COVID-19 is beginning to disrupt the supply of agricultural products and food to consumers and the marketplace across and within borders. The different spring crops, such as sunflower, canola, maize, barley, spring wheat, and various field vegetables, cannot be grown during COVID-19. Consequently, COVID-19 has had a binding effect on the food supply chain and agriculture due to the disruption, which the government should have addressed promptly.

1. Introduction

Agriculture is an important sector, providing food to the rapidly increasing population, and it plays an important role in global economic growth [1,2,3]. Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) has caused a critical situation and global human health problems [4,5]. Essential security measures due to COVID-19, such as isolation and restrictions, will continue for several months and have indeterminate end dates [6,7,8,9]. Worldwide struggles to control COVID-19 due to the restrictions on human movement are certainly producing social costs and economic shocks that will impact the effectiveness of food systems and agriculture [10,11,12,13]. COVID-19 has both direct and indirect effects on agricultural systems worldwide [14]. The maximum decrease in the demand for commercial and restaurant food facilities, in conjunction with constraints in labor, preparation capacity [15], and storage, has prompted farmers to dispose of their output as a group [16,17]. Isolation measures are highly influential on labor availability for time-intensive farming, from seeding vegetable crops to picking produce [18,19]. With the emergence of COVID-19, these effects are likely to be felt even more deeply and widely in rural areas and public economies [20,21,22,23,24].
The pandemic negatively affected all four pillars of food security: food availability, food access, food use, and food security stability [25]. The impact of reduced agricultural production, supply chain disruptions, food price increases, lower household incomes, and unemployment significantly affected people’s access to nutritious food [26,27]. During the pandemic period, vulnerable groups such as low-income families, informal workers, women, children, and rural communities suffered from higher food insecurity and malnutrition [28,29]. The economic consequences of the pandemic further aggravated food insecurity worldwide [30,31]. The global recession due to COVID-19 resulted in lower incomes, business closures, and higher unemployment rates [32]. Millions of people lost their jobs or had reduced earning opportunities, which reduced their purchasing power and access to food [33]. Households in many developing countries, where social safety nets are weak or non-existent, had to cut back on the amount of food and variety of food they consumed [34]. School closures also affected school feeding programs, leaving millions of children without regular nutritious meals [35]. During the pandemic, there was a significant rise in hunger and extreme poverty, which undermined the progress made over the years towards the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), specifically SDG-1 (No Poverty) and SDG-2 (Zero Hunger) [36].
The agriculture and food systems are crucial for food security, economic development, and the livelihood of billions of people globally [37]. The COVID-19 pandemic in late 2019 was a global shock that spread beyond the health context, which severely impacted agri-activities. Crop production, management of livestock, and availability of necessary agricultural inputs were impacted by lockdowns, travel restrictions, and shortage of labor in many areas, resulting in lower productivity [38]. At the same time, disruptions to transportation networks, processing facilities, and international trade disrupted food supply chains and agricultural markets, causing prices to fluctuate and limiting market access [39]. The impact of these challenges was to worsen socioeconomic inequalities, increase food insecurity of vulnerable groups, and reveal vulnerabilities in the resilience of global food systems. There are many studies on these issues, but there is a lack of a complete synthesis that combines evidence from regions and sectors [40]. This review thus seeks to critically assess the effects of COVID-19 on agriculture and food security, outlining some of the major challenges, implications for policy, and future research areas for bolstering resilient food systems. While many studies have been conducted on the impact of COVID-19 on agriculture and food systems, they have been conducted on a regional or commodity-specific basis, leaving the evidence disjointed and not easily compared across regions. Furthermore, past reviews tend to focus on descriptive summary rather than a critical synthesis of challenges, strategies for resilience, and policy implications. In light of this, the present review seeks to systematically review the effects of COVID-19 on agricultural production, food supply chains, labor shortages, and food security on a global level. This review will provide an overall picture to inform future research and evidence-based policy by crosscutting findings from the different geographical settings and highlighting any trends or gaps in the research.

2. Methodology

The review article was carried out through a systematic literature review method to comprehensively assess the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on global agriculture and food security. The methodology aimed to identify, gather, analyze, and synthesize scientific evidence on agricultural disruptions, food supply chains, food accessibility, socioeconomic impacts, policy responses, and future resilience strategies in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The review process followed the general principles of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) framework to ensure transparency, reliability, and consistency in the selection and evaluation of the relevant literature [41]. The PRISMA approach is well known for systematic reviews and is used to reduce bias in the selection of the literature and data synthesis (Figure 1). Multiple international scientific databases and academic search engines were used to conduct a comprehensive literature search to ensure wide coverage of peer-reviewed publications and institutional reports. The databases searched in this review were Scopus, Web of Science, Science Direct, Springer Link, PubMed, and Google Scholar [41]. Furthermore, reports and policy documents from international organizations like the Food and Agriculture Organization, World Health Organization, World Bank, and the United Nations were consulted to get the latest information on agricultural production, food systems, and food security during the pandemic.
The literature search was conducted on studies published from January 2020 to March 2026, as the COVID-19 outbreak occurred in late 2019 and most of the scientific studies related to COVID-19 were published after 2020. Various combinations of keywords and Boolean operators were used to identify relevant studies associated with agriculture and food security during the pandemic. The main search terms were COVID-19 and agriculture, COVID-19 and food security, pandemic and food systems, COVID-19 impacts on agricultural supply chains, food insecurity during COVID-19, smallholder farmers and COVID-19, agricultural resilience, and sustainable food systems. Keyword frequency was analyzed in the included research papers, and a word cloud diagram was made using the following link: https://www.wordclouds.com [42]. Furthermore, we characterized the main findings according to the COVID-19 pandemic as well as its impact on food security and agriculture.
Figure 1 also provides a summary of the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the search strategy, the study selection procedure, and the approach used for quality assessment. Two reviewers screened and assessed eligibility independently, and disagreements were resolved by discussion and consultation with a third reviewer, if needed. Appropriate appraisal tools have been used to assess methodological quality and thus ensure that the evidence synthesized in this review was the result of a thorough and rigorous selection process.

3. Results

For this review, 150 articles were studied, and their keywords were collected. Figure 2 presents the word cloud of keywords found in all reviewed research papers. The term “coronavirus 2019” was the most used word, along with other words; for example, “Agriculture”, “COVID-19”, “pandemic”, “Food security”, and “disease.” The terms “SARS-CoV-2”, “health”, “Food supply chain”, “Cropping pattern”, “Vegetable”, “Fruit harvests”, “socioeconomic”, and “Vegetation cover” are regularly used in research papers as keywords. We also observed that most research papers were on “Farm inputs resilience”, “Agricultural system connectivity”, “human activity”, “Food demand”, ‘’Labour availability’’, ‘’livestock’’, ‘’human health problems’’, ‘’food markets’’, ‘’Agriculture resilience’’, and ‘’ web of science (WoS)’’ (Figure 1).

3.1. COVID-19’s Impact on Agriculture

Due to the COVID-19 lockdown, the decrease or shutdown of human activity, and disruptions to the food supply chain, access to agronomic markets worldwide can be limited. Table 1 presents the key findings of the selected research papers on COVID-19 and agriculture. Most articles were conducted in various countries, and others used statistical software. MS Excel and SPSS 30 are the main software used in most research papers.

3.1.1. Cropping Pattern and Vegetable and Fruit Harvests

The vegetable sector was particularly affected, as vegetables have a short shelf life and demand is constantly high. Transportation systems were affected by lockdowns, and farmers had limited access to cold storage facilities, which led to more farmers losing profits due to spoilage [51]. Small-scale vegetable farmers who rely on the daily sale of their produce at local markets were directly affected by the temporary closure of these markets in many developing nations. There was also a decrease in consumer demand for fresh vegetables in urban areas due to less transportation and consumer purchasing power. As a result, during the pandemic period (2020–2021), many of the farmers had lower income and difficulties recovering production costs [52,53].
Due to the unenviable labor during COVID-19, wheat was the most affected in this season during lockdown (Figure 3). Overall, 55% of farmers had grown fruit and vegetables in the previous season. According to Iaccarino et al. [54], 25% of farmers reported completing their entire harvest during the season, and an additional 45% stated that they had finalized at least one harvest [55]. Many farmers, including a large proportion of fruit and vegetable farmers, reported problems marketing their yields during COVID-19. According to Pulighe and Lupia [56], during the lockdown, fruit and vegetable farmers initially faced low prices, and most could not visit marketplaces due to COVID-19. Due to low prices, farmers did not sell their produce, making it less accessible [57]. Most farmers stated that COVID-19 was the central reason for all these difficulties [58,59,60].

3.1.2. Farm Input Resilience and Agricultural System Connectivity

The COVID-19 pandemic has severely impacted the availability and accessibility of critical farm inputs and, consequently, agricultural productivity and resilience worldwide [62]. Seeds, fertilizers, pesticides, irrigation equipment, fuel, machinery, veterinary supplies, and agricultural labor are all critical inputs for agricultural production systems and are often not available when needed [63]. Lockdowns and limits on industrial production, transport, and trade, however, disrupted production and delivery of these agricultural inputs in many countries. Crop establishment and yields were negatively affected by farmers’ delays in accessing inputs during critical planting and growing seasons [64,65].
According to Rad et al. [46], a limited number of countries are similarly studying domestic “food power” to address concerns about developing national food production amid COVID-19, including Iran. Such activities have genuine consequences for our global agriculture and food distribution systems and may be among the most important effects on the current food system [66,67,68,69,70].
There were extensive shifts in prices as well as the comparative cost of agricultural yields on agricultural management adoptions in the marketplace [71]. There was a new rivalry for basic information sources, particularly water, due to the growing emphasis on sanitation systems and public health [72]. Effects of the handling interruptions and food supply chain on animal safety were noted [73]. According to Štreimikienė et al. [74], the relative strength and financial disparities of agricultural and other informal organizational frameworks depend on agricultural stability and income generation [75,76,77,78].

3.2. COVID-19’s Impact on Food Security

Of immediate concern are disruptions to food supply chains and their effects on food production. The food exchange framework across practically all countries across the income spectrum has been deeply disturbed by the pandemic [79]. There is broad media coverage of abrupt reductions in food production for several reasons; for example, decreased earnings from laborers who are fully or partially furloughed, which affects their capacity to buy food [80]. Table 2 presents the key findings of the selected research papers on food security and COVID-19. Most articles were conducted in various countries, and others used statistical software.

3.2.1. Food Supply Chain

The food supply chain was one of the sectors most affected by the COVID-19 pandemic [89,90]. Food supply chains are a set of linked activities associated with agricultural production, processing, transport, storage, distribution, marketing, and consumption of food [91,92]. Lockdowns, travel bans, and border controls affected these interdependent processes and posed significant logistical challenges for transporting food products from farms to consumers [93].
The food supply chain is also a social safety net that many low-income countries need to support children and families with limited financial resources [94,95]. There is a more pronounced effect on livestock due to difficulties accessing animal feed and, again, the lack of work [96,97]. According to Erinle et al. [39], in spite of the fact that they rely on the nation and the procedures that the whole world has embraced, costs have remained steady; thus, no spikes in the costs of fundamental necessities are expected. However, they are more likely to occur for high-value items, mainly perishables and meat [98,99]. Utilization and availability remain almost steady [100,101,102,103,104,105]. The impact of COVID-19 on food security and the supply chain, with a main effect on food distribution, is described in Figure 4.

3.2.2. Food Demand and Labor Availability

Food demand structures were drastically altered due to the closure of restaurants, hotels, schools, and tourism-related businesses [106,107]. Demand for food products sold to the hospitality and food service industries dropped significantly, adversely impacting producers of dairy products, seafood, meat, fruits, and vegetables [108,109]. At the same time, there was a rise in the demand for packaged foods, processed products, and shelf-stable goods in households due to more time spent at home during lockdowns [110,111]. These unexpected shifts in consumption led to disruptions in food supply chains and necessitated quick adaptation of food distribution measures by food producers and retailers [112,113,114,115]. According to Weiler and Grez [106], there have been considerable limitations on global labor development and labor programs fundamental to agronomic production in certain regions, which have created bottlenecks. This appears to be especially serious in livestock production systems, horticulture, and processing, as well as in planting and harvesting that are moderately labor-intensive. During the pandemic, the pandemic’s impact on household incomes and the increase in unemployment also impacted food demand and dietary quality. Businesses closed, and the economy slowed, resulting in millions losing their jobs or having their wages cut [116,117]. This meant that low-income families had to opt for less nutritious food combinations of staple foods rather than fruits, vegetables, dairy, and protein. In a number of developing countries, there was a decrease in dietary diversity, which can contribute to malnutrition and food insecurity for vulnerable groups [118,119]. The second important issue concerns labor accessibility in the agriculture and food system. Labor shortages were a major problem in labor-intensive industries such as fruit, vegetable, dairy, fisheries, and meat processing [120]. Labor shortages in several countries led to unharvested crops, substantial post-harvest losses, and lower farm incomes [121]. Illness outbreaks, workplace safety issues, and social distancing measures also affected food processing facilities, leading to workforce reductions. These labor limitations impacted food production, processing efficiency, and the stability of the food supply chain [122,123]. Laborers have been abruptly limited in numerous locales because of isolated measures, as well as the damage to the workforce due to COVID-19-related illness and deaths [124,125].
The comparative synthesis highlights the key differences in COVID-19’s impact on agriculture and food systems between developed and developing countries, as gleaned from the literature reviewed (n = 150 studies). In developed countries, agricultural production decline was reported in 18–25% of studies, which resulted in moderate impacts with mechanization and policy support, while 55–70% of studies reported severe agricultural production losses in developing countries due to labor shortages and limited access to inputs. Occupational shortages were also reported in 68% of the studies in the developing countries, as opposed to 22% in the developed countries, again indicating a greater reliance on manual work. The food supply chain disruptions in developed regions were short-term (30–40% of studies), and in developing regions, they were prolonged (65–75%). A total of 20–30% of developed country studies reported worsening food insecurity, and 60–80% of developing country studies reported significant impacts. The level of adoption of digital agriculture was high in developed countries (50–65%) and low in developing countries (25–15%).

4. Discussion

The COVID-19 pandemic unveiled the fragility of the global food chain and how health crises can quickly transform into food security and economic crises. The results of this review align with previous work that found significant disruptions in agricultural value chains during the pandemic. Laborde et al. [126] found that the mobility and international trade restrictions disrupted food availability and raised the threat to food security, especially in developing countries. Likewise, Swinnen & Vos [127] highlighted that food production has been fairly consistent worldwide, but logistical and labor shortages were affecting the food supply chain. Vegetable and fruit markets were most affected due to the spread of COVID-19. Due to the closing of markets and restaurants, produce distributors and farmers were required to transfer supplies entirely from the food production to the marketplace. These effects are additionally being felt in agriculture and food security. Almost 55% of researchers indicated that COVID-19 has the most impact on agriculture and its complete harvest during the season, and an additional 45% stated that COVID-19 has adversely affected food security.
Previous studies have also shown that the pandemic has driven digitalization in agriculture. According to Barrett et al. [128] and Aday and Aday [129], remote advisory services, precision agriculture technology, and the use of digital marketplaces were all increasing to compensate for mobility issues. These technological adjustments ensured market connectivity and better coordination of the supply chain in spite of the lockdowns. Furthermore, there is a growing body of research that has exposed the resistance to diversified agricultural production. Multiple cropping, multiple enterprises, and local marketing systems tended to recover faster than highly specialized production systems. This observation aligns with the emerging view that agricultural diversification offers a way of making agriculture more resilient when facing future global shocks. COVID-19 experiences have a number of key policy lessons [130]. First, governments should consider agriculture/food logistics as critical infrastructure and ensure its uninterrupted operation during emergencies. Agricultural inputs, labor, and harvested products must be able to be transported, so contingency plans need to be put in place for this. Second, by making the food supply chain locally and regionally more resilient, it will lessen reliance on imports. Investments in storage facilities, cold chain, and transport infrastructure will reduce post-harvest losses and improve market stability. Third, digital agriculture must be on the agenda of strategic goals. Policies for digital extension services, mobile market information systems, e-commerce, and precision farming technologies can contribute to efficiency and minimize vulnerability to mobility restrictions.
It is time to implement a food monitor and transparent distribution of statistics to support government administration of the food marketplace, prevent panic, and monitor farmers to make informed crop production decisions. It is also necessary to confirm national and international agricultural and food supply chains. Moreover, the pandemic highlighted the need for food security planning alongside other sustainability and public health goals. Resilient agricultural systems that can withstand economic shocks, climate change, and pandemics are essential to achieve the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, especially SDG-1 (No Poverty), SDG-2 (Zero Hunger), SDG-3 (Good Health and Well-being), and SDG-13 (Climate Action). Further studies are needed to examine the long-term impacts of the pandemic on agriculture, strategies to build resilience, and the potential of new technologies in sustainable food systems. Overall, the COVID-19 pandemic was a worldwide warning about the vulnerability of agricultural and food systems. Additionally, the interaction between climate change and pandemics on agricultural resilience should be studied; many areas are also affected by both climate change and an outbreak of disease. Comprehensive risk assessments can be made using integrated modeling approaches that link epidemiological, climatic, and economic parameters. In conclusion, COVID-19 showed that resilient agriculture requires not just production capacity but also strong and integrated supply chains, policies, technological innovations, and sound governance. The COVID-19 pandemic leaves a legacy of lessons that can inform the redesigned adaptive, inclusive food systems that help to withstand future shocks whilst sustaining global food security.

5. Conclusions

COVID-19 revealed a number of vulnerabilities in the globalized food system and the danger of over-reliance on complex international food chains. Inability to deliver agricultural inputs, food processing industries, export systems, and transportation networks showed a need for more localized, diversified, and resilient agricultural systems. The technological developments showed significant promise for enhancing agricultural efficiency, improving transparency in the value chain, and increasing resilience to future crises. COVID-19 significantly affects people’s activities and actions; agriculture is also affected. Agricultural and food demands are severely constrained by portability limits and diminished buying power, as well as by a further projected impact on the most vulnerable population groups. Vegetable and fruit markets were most affected due to the spread of COVID-19. Due to the closing of markets and restaurants, produce distributors and farmers were required to transfer supplies entirely from the food production to the marketplace. These effects are additionally being felt in agriculture and food security. Almost 55% of researchers indicated that COVID-19 has the most impact on agriculture and its complete harvest during the season, and an additional 45% stated that COVID-19 has adversely affected food security. For example, in response to the COVID-19 outbreak, governments have implemented additional exceptional measures to curb the virus’s spread, which has likewise affected food supply and security worldwide. The food supply chain and agriculture have been hit hardest by the pandemic, which has affected food production for the most vulnerable segment of the population. Furthermore, most informal and migrant laborers are losing their jobs, which may affect food demand and supply. The findings can be interpreted within the framework of food system resilience, highlighting the importance of adaptive agricultural policies, diversified supply chains, digital agricultural technologies, and social protection programs in reducing future crisis impacts. Economically, the pandemic contributed to increased food prices, reduced farmer incomes, and led to instability in agricultural trade, emphasizing the need for resilient policy interventions and sustainable food security strategies at both national and global levels.

Author Contributions

Data collection and analysis, S.H. and M.M.; software, S.A.Q., W.N. and M.S.; proofreading, M.T. and S.F.; write-up, H.M.R.J. and S.H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article. Further enquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Ahmed, M.; Aslam, M.A.; Hayat, R.; Nasim, W.; Akmal, M.; Mubeen, M.; Ahmad, S. Nutrient Dynamics and the Role of Modeling. In Building Climate Resilience in Agriculture; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 297–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  2. Akram, R.; Amanet, K.; Iqbal, J.; Fatima, M.; Mubeen, M.; Hussain, S.; Fahad, S. Climate Change, Insects and Global Food Production. In Climate Change and Ecosystems; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2022; pp. 47–60. [Google Scholar]
  3. Ali, M.; Mubeen, M.; Hussain, N.; Wajid, A.; Farid, H.U.; Awais, M.; Hussain, S.; Akram, W.; Amin, A.; Akram, R.; et al. Role of ICT in Crop Management. In Agronomic Crops; Springer: Singapore, 2019; pp. 637–652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  4. Amjath-Babu, T.S.; Krupnik, T.J.; Thilsted, S.H.; McDonald, A.J. Key indicators for monitoring food system disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic: Insights from Bangladesh towards effective response. Food Secur. 2020, 12, 761–768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  5. Arab-Mazar, Z.; Sah, R.; Rabaan, A.A.; Dhama, K.; Rodriguez-Morales, A.J. Mapping the incidence of the COVID-19 hotspot in Iran–Implications for Travellers. Travel Med. Infect. Dis. 2020, 34, 101630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  6. Arndt, C.; Davies, R.; Gabriel, S.; Harris, L.; Makrelov, K.; Robinson, S.; Anderson, L. Covid-19 lockdowns, income distribution, and food security: An analysis for South Africa. Glob. Food Secur. 2020, 26, 100410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  7. Béné, C.; Bakker, D.; Chavarro, M.J.; Even, B.; Melo, J.; Sonneveld, A. Global assessment of the impacts of COVID-19 on food security. Glob. Food Secur. 2021, 31, 100575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  8. Boyacι-Gündüz, C.P.; Ibrahim, S.A.; Wei, O.C.; Galanakis, C.M. Transformation of the food sector: Security and resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic. Foods 2021, 10, 497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  9. Capano, G.; Howlett, M.; Jarvis, D.S.; Ramesh, M.; Goyal, N. Mobilizing policy (in) capacity to fight COVID-19: Understanding variations in state responses. Policy Soc. 2020, 39, 285–308. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  10. Chen, Q.; Liang, M.; Li, Y.; Guo, J.; Fei, D.; Wang, L.; Wang, J. Mental health care for medical staff in China during the COVID-19 outbreak. Lancet Psychiatry 2020, 7, e15–e16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  11. Chiu, P.W.Y.; Ng, S.C.; Inoue, H.; Reddy, D.N.; Hu, E.L.; Cho, J.Y.; Wang, H.P. Practice of endoscopy during COVID-19 pandemic: Position statements of the Asian Pacific Society for Digestive Endoscopy (APSDE-COVID statements). Gut 2020, 69, 991–996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  12. Chiwona-Karltun, L.; Amuakwa-Mensah, F.; Wamala-Larsson, C.; Amuakwa-Mensah, S.; Abu Hatab, A.; Made, N.; Bizoza, A.R. COVID-19: From health crises to food security anxiety and policy implications. Ambio 2021, 50, 794–811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  13. Akram, W.; Yaseen, M.; Hussain, S.; Ullah, S.; Qaisrani, S.A.; Haider, M.; Javeed, H.M.R. Integrating geospatial techniques for the assessing of multiple geo-environmental hazards susceptibility in Upper Indus Basin Pakistan. Geosci. Lett. 2025, 12, 71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  14. Arshad, M.Z.; Hussain, S.; Qaisrani, S.A.; Iqbal, Z.; Saeed, M.; Mubeen, M.; Karuppannan, S. Using google earth engine to detect the land use changes, climate change and vegetation dynamics. Geosci. Lett. 2025, 12, 54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  15. Saleh, N.; Rizik, M.; Zawiah, M.; Abu-Farha, R.K. Community pharmacists’ perceptions of mental health care: A qualitative study on stigma and barriers. J. Health Psychol. 2026, 31, 41–51. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  16. Saleh, Z.T.; Aslanoğlu, A.; Elshatarat, R.A.; Al-Za’areer, M.S.; Almagharbeh, W.T.; Alhejaili, A.A.; Alasmari, A.A. Exploring the reasons and significant influencing factors of serious turnover intentions among nurses in Saudi Arabia. J. Edu. Health Promot. 2025, 14, 206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  17. Othman, E.H.; Alosta, M.R.; Nofal, B.; Masadeh, A.; Darawad, M.W.; Sabra, M.A.A.; Alshareef, A. Shift work and health behaviors: Cross-sectional analysis of sleep quality, physical activity, and dietary patterns. Acta Biomed. 2025, 96, 16438. [Google Scholar]
  18. Abu Maloh, H.I.A.; Soh, K.L.; Chong, S.C.; Ismail, S.I.F.; Soh, K.G.; Abu Maloh, D.I.; AbuRuz, M.E. Efficacy of Benson’s relaxation technique on stress and pain among patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis: A systematic review. SAGE Open Nurs. 2024, 10, 23779608241251663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  19. Al-Amoosh, H.H.S.; Al-Amer, R.; Alamoush, A.H.; Alquran, F.; Atallah Aldajeh, T.M.; Al Rahamneh, T.A.; Darwish, T. Outcomes of COVID-19 in pregnant women: A retrospective analysis of 300 cases in Jordan. Healthcare 2024, 12, 2113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  20. Arshad, M.Z.; Hussain, S.; Iqbal, Z.; Qaisrani, S.A.; Mubeen, M.; Tahir, M.; Karuppannan, S. Analyzing temporal changes in urban land use and climate dynamics through Google Earth Engine. J. Earth Syst. Sci. 2025, 134, 159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  21. Wang, Q.; Hussain, S.; Qaisrani, S.A.; Mubeen, M.; Tahir, M.; Javeed, H.M.R. Assessing past and future prediction of land use land cover changes using CA-Markov chain model. Environ. Earth Sci. 2025, 84, 352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  22. Hussain, S.; Qaisrani, S.A.; Tariq, A.; Mubeen, M.; Ullah, S. Assessing Past, Present, and Simulated Future Prediction of Land Use Land Cover Changes using CA-Markov Chain Models with Satellite Data. Results Eng. 2025, 26, 105585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  23. Hu, Y.; Raza, A.; Lu, Y.; Acharki, S.; Hussain, S.; Ray, R.L. Spatio-Temporal Analysis of Vegetation Loss, Land Surface Temperature Changes, and Their Relationship with Vegetation Indices in Zhenjiang, China Using Satellite Imagery. Earth Syst. Environ. 2024, 8, 1037–1058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  24. Feng, L.; Hussain, S.; Pricope, N.G.; Arshad, S.; Tariq, A.; Feng, L.; El-Askary, H. Seasonal Dynamics in Land Surface Temperature in Response to Land Use Land Cover Changes Using Google Earth Engine. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl. Earth Obser. Remote Sens. 2024, 17, 17983–17997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  25. Raza, A.; Syed, N.R.; Fahmeed, R.; Acharki, S.; Aljohani, T.H.; Hussain, S.; Abdo, H.G. Investigation of changes in land use/land cover using principal component analysis and supervised classification from operational land imager satellite data: A case study of under developed regions, Pakistan. Discov. Sustain. 2024, 5, 73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  26. Haque, M.A.; Sonal, D.; Ahmad, S.; Abdeljaber, H.A. Leveraging IoT for Wildlife Deterrence: Smart Solutions for Crop Protection in Modern Farming. In IoT and Advanced Intelligence Computation for Smart Agriculture; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2026; pp. 126–139. [Google Scholar]
  27. Alkayed, M.; Almasalha, F.; Hijjawi, M.; Qutqut, M.H. Factors analysis affecting academic achievement of undergraduate student: A study on faculty of information technology students at applied science private university. In 2023 International Conference on Business Analytics for Technology and Security (ICBATS); IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2023; pp. 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  28. Albashayreh, A.; Najadat, H. Detecting the impact of COVID-19 on social media using bert-based model. In 2024 15th International Conference on Information and Communication Systems (ICICS); IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2024; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  29. Bsoul, Q.; Zawaideh, F.; Alqadi, B.S.; Almusfar, L.A.; Khalaf, O.I.; Alattas, A.S.; AbdElminaam, D.S. From user preferences to accurate predictions: Enhancing movie recommendation systems with neural collaborative filtering and sentiment analysis. SN Comput. Sci. 2025, 6, 257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  30. Raza, A.; Syed, N.R.; Zubair, M.; Acharki, S.; Vishwakarma, D.K.; Hussain, S.; Alqahtani, F.M. Impact of Land Use Land Cover Change on Surface Water Extent and Carbon Sequestration in Southern Punjab Using Geospatial Techniques. In Remote Sensing, GIS and Modelling for Water Resource Management; Sunitha, V., Muralidhara Reddy, B., Sudharshan Reddy, Y., Prasad, M., Kumar Pradeep, B., Balaji, E., Eds.; Springer Water; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  31. Darabseh, M.Z.; Selfe, J.; Morse, C.I.; Aburub, A.; Degens, H. Does aerobic exercise facilitate vaping and smoking cessation: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials with meta-analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 14034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  32. Alomari, M.A.; Khabour, O.F.; Alzoubi, K.H.; Aburub, A. The impact of COVID-19 confinement on reading behavior. Clin. Pract. Epidemiol. Ment. Health CP EMH 2023, 19, e174501792304260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  33. Abedalaziz, W.; Al-Sharman, A.; Aburub, A.; Latrous, M.S.; Esser, P.; Dawes, H.; Khalil, H. The relationship between sleep quality and gait in people with multiple sclerosis: A pilot study. Hong Kong Physiother. J. 2024, 44, 11–19. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  34. Aburub, A.; Darabseh, M.Z.; Badran, R.; Shurrab, A.A.; Khadra, F.A.; Al-Rawajfeh, R.; Al-Akdar, Y. The Use of Food Scanning Mobile Applications in Weight Loss: A Systematic Review of Longitudinal Interventional Studies. Phys. Act. Health 2025, 9, 161–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  35. Reheim, M.A.A.; Abdou, M.M.; El-Gaby, M.S.; Al-Omari, M.H.; Abu-Rayyan, A.; Al-Assy, W.H.; Hafiz, I.S.A. Bioactivity of novel isoxazole-fused heterocycles: Comprehensive antimicrobial, antioxidant activities, SwissADME predictions, molecular docking, and DFT analysis. Mol. Divers. 2025, 30, 595–612. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  36. Ishaq, M.; Mubeen, M.; Hussain, S.; Farid, H.U.; El Sabagh, A.; Nasim, W.; Rahman, M.H.U. Nanotechnology in Agriculture: Current Trends and Future Prospects Under Changing Climate. In Nanotechnology for Agriculture; Apple Academic Press: Palm Bay, FL, USA, 2025; pp. 223–236. [Google Scholar]
  37. Cook, T.M.; El-Boghdadly, K.; McGuire, B.; McNarry, A.F.; Patel, A.; Higgs, A. Consensus guidelines for managing the airway in patients with COVID-19: Guidelines from the Difficult Airway Society, the Association of Anaesthetists the Intensive Care Society, the Faculty of Intensive Care Medicine and the Royal College of Anaesthetists. Anaesthesia 2020, 75, 785–799. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  38. Din, M.S.U.; Mubeen, M.; Hussain, S.; Ahmad, A.; Hussain, N.; Ali, M.A.; Nasim, W. World Nations Priorities on Climate Change and Food Security. In Building Climate Resilience Agri; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 365–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  39. Erinle, K.O.; Ogwu, M.C.; Evivie, S.E.; Zaheer, M.S.; Ogunyemi, S.O.; Adeniran, S.O. Impacts of COVID-19 on Agriculture and Food Security in Developing Countries: Potential Mitigation Strategies; CABI Reviews: Oxfordshire, UK, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  40. Farrell, P.; Thow, A.M.; Wate, J.T.; Nonga, N.; Vatucawaqa, P.; Brewer, T.; Eriksson, H. COVID-19 and Pacific food system resilience: Opportunities to build a robust response. Food Secur. 2021, 12, 783–791. [Google Scholar]
  41. Guo, Y.R.; Cao, Q.D.; Hong, Z.S.; Tan, Y.Y.; Chen, S.D.; Jin, H.J.; Tan, K.S.; Wang, D.Y.; Yan, Y. The origin, transmission and clinical therapies on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak—An update on the status. Mil. Med. Res. 2020, 7, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  42. Hanson, K.E.; Caliendo, A.M.; Arias, C.A.; Englund, J.A.; Lee, M.J.; Loeb, M.; Lavergne, V. Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines on the diagnosis of COVID-19. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2020, 78, e106–e132. [Google Scholar]
  43. Gray, R. Agriculture, transportation, and the COVID-19 crisis. Can. J. Agri. Eco./Rev. Can. D’agroeconomie 2020, 68, 239–243. [Google Scholar]
  44. Jamal, S. How Will COVID-19 Affect Pakistan Farmers, Food System? Gulf News Published: Dubai, United Arab Emirates, 2020; Available online: https://gulfnews.com/world/asia/pakistan/how-will-covid-19-affect-pakistan-farmers-food-system-1.71196910 (accessed on 12 May 2023).
  45. Adhikari, J.; Timsina, J.; Khadka, S.R.; Ghale, Y.; Ojha, H. COVID-19 impacts on agriculture and food systems in Nepal: Implications for SDGs. Agric. Syst. 2021, 186, 102990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  46. Rad, A.K.; Shamshiri, R.R.; Azarm, H.; Balasundram, S.K.; Sultan, M. Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on food security and agriculture in Iran: A survey. Sustainability 2021, 13, 10103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  47. Murdad, R.; Muhiddin, M.; Osman, W.H.; Tajidin, N.E.; Haida, Z.; Awang, A.; Jalloh, M.B. Ensuring Urban Food Security in Malaysia during the COVID-19 Pandemic—Is Urban Farming the Answer? A Review. Sustainability 2022, 14, 4155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  48. Popescu, G.C.; Popescu, M. COVID-19 pandemic and agriculture in Romania: Effects on agricultural systems, compliance with restrictions and relations with authorities. Food Secur. 2022, 14, 557–567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  49. Rogito, J.; Rogito, N. Addressing the effects of COVID-19 on agriculture and food security situation in Africa. J. Innov. Sustain. 2022, 6, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  50. Wei, C.; Liu, X.; Zhang, L.; Wan, Y.; Huang, G.; Lu, Y.; Zhang, X. Resilience analysis of global agricultural trade. Environ. Plan. B Urban Anal. City Sci. 2024, 51, 1003–1006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  51. Mehmood, A.; Naveed, K.; Khan, S.U.; Farid, A.; Khan, S.M.; Hussain, Q.; Fahad, S. Mitigating Adverse Effects of Salinity Through Foliar Application of Biostimulants. In Environment, Climate, Plant and Vegetation Growth; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2024; pp. 115–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  52. Al-Salihi, Z.K.; Hassan, D.F.; Hamid, M.Q.; Hussain, S. Satellite-Based Monitoring of Soil Moisture and Land Degradation in Iraq’s Major River Systems. In Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Water Resource and Environmental Management. WREM 2025. Environmental Science and Engineering; Xu, H., Ed.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  53. Alaei, N.; Mostafazadeh, R.; Moezzipour, B.; Hussain, S.; Hosseinzadehniri, M. The impact of urbanization on green spaces spatial pattern from 2003 to 2017: A landscape metrics analysis in Ardabil city, Iran. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2025, 32, 22331–22345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  54. Iaccarino, G.; Grassi, G.; Borghi, C.; Ferri, C.; Salvetti, M.; Volpe, M. Age and multimorbidity predict death among COVID-19 patients: Results of the SARS-RAS study of the Italian Society of hypertension. Hypertension 2020, 76, 366–372. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  55. Mostafazadeh, R.; Alaei, N.; Mirchooli, F.; Hussain, S. Changes in urban green space configuration and connectivity using spatial graph-based metrics in Ardabil developing city, Iran. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2024, 196, 778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  56. Pulighe, G.; Lupia, F. Food first: COVID-19 outbreak and cities lockdown a booster for a wider vision on urban agriculture. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  57. Harris, J.; Depenbusch, L.; Pal, A.A.; Nair, R.M.; Ramasamy, S. Food system disruption: Initial livelihood and dietary effects of COVID-19 on vegetable producers in India. Food Secur. 2020, 12, 841–851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  58. Huss, M.; Brander, M.; Kassie, M.; Ehlert, U.; Bernauer, T. Improved storage mitigates vulnerability to food-supply shocks in smallholder agriculture during the COVID-19 pandemic. Glob. Food Secur. 2021, 28, 100468. [Google Scholar]
  59. Hussain, S.; Amin, A.; Mubeen, M.; Khaliq, T.; Shahid, M.; Hammad, H.M.; Nasim, W. Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA) Technologies. In Building Climate Resilience in Agriculture; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 319–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  60. Jaacks, L.M.; Veluguri, D.; Serupally, R.; Roy, A.; Prabhakaran, P.; Ramanjaneyulu, G.V. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on agricultural production, livelihoods, and food security in India: Baseline results of a phone survey. Food Secur. 2021, 13, 1323–1339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  61. Islam, M.S.; Fahad, S.; Hossain, A.; Chowdhury, M.K.; Iqbal, M.A.; Dubey, A.; Sabagh, A.E. Legumes under Drought Stress: Plant Responses, Adaptive Mechanisms, and Management Strategies in Relation to Nitrogen Fixation. In Engineering Tolerance in Crop Plants Against Abiotic Stress; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2021; pp. 179–207. [Google Scholar]
  62. Islam, Z.; Kokash, D.M.; Babar, M.S.; Uday, U.; Hasan, M.M.; Rackimuthu, S.; Nemat, A. Food security, conflict, and COVID-19: Perspective from Afghanistan. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2022, 106, 21. [Google Scholar]
  63. Raza, A.; Syed, N.R.; Fahmeed, R.; Acharki, S.; Hussain, S.; Zubair, M.; Mattar, M.A. A Remote Sensing and GIS-Based Analysis of Forest Cover Changes and Carbon Sequestration Trends Over Three Decades. Environ. Dev. 2025, 55, 101232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  64. Kansiime, M.K.; Tambo, J.A.; Mugambi, M.I.; Bundi, M.M.; Kara, A.; Owuor, M.C. COVID-19 implications on household income and food security in Kenya and Uganda: Findings from a rapid assessment. World Dev. 2020, 137, 105199. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  65. Karuppasamy, M.B.; Seshachalam, S.; Natesan, U.; Ayyamperumal, R.; Karuppannan, S.; Gopalakrishnan, G.; Nazir, N. Air pollution improvement and mortality rate during COVID-19 pandemic in India: Global intersectional study. Air Qual. Atmos. Health 2020, 10, 1375–1384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  66. Kreutz, R.; Algharably, E.A.E.H.; Azizi, M.; Dobrowolski, P.; Guzik, T.; Januszewicz, A.; Burnier, M. Hypertension, the renin–angiotensin system, and the risk of lower respiratory tract infections and lung injury: Implications for COVID-19 European Society of Hypertension COVID-19 Task Force Review of Evidence. Cardiovasc. Res. 2020, 116, 1688–1699. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  67. Malik, K.; Meki, M.; Morduch, J.; Ogden, T.; Quinn, S.; Said, F. COVID-19 and the Future of Microfinance: Evidence and Insights from Pakistan. Oxf. Rev. Econ. Policy 2020, 36, S138–S168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  68. Mandal, S.C.; Boidya, P.; Haque, M.I.M.; Hossain, A.; Shams, Z.; Mamun, A.A. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on fish consumption and household food security in Dhaka city, Bangladesh. Glob. Food Secur. 2021, 29, 100526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  69. Marietta, M.; Ageno, W.; Artoni, A.; De Candia, E.; Gresele, P.; Marchetti, M.; Tripodi, A. COVID-19 and haemostasis: A position paper from Italian Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (SISET). Blood Transfus. 2020, 18, 167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  70. Masood, N.; Akram, R.; Fatima, M.; Mubeen, M.; Hussain, S.; Shakeel, M.; Nasim, W. Insect Pest Management Under Climate Change. In Building Climate Resilience in Agriculture; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 225–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  71. Miller, M. 2019 Novel Coronavirus COVID-19 (2019-nCoV) Data Repository. Bull.-Assoc. Can. Map Libr. Arch. 2020, 164, 47–51. [Google Scholar]
  72. Mubeen, M.; Bano, A.; Ali, B.; Islam, Z.U.; Ahmad, A.; Hussain, S.; Fahad, S.; Nasim, W. Effect of plant growth promoting bacteria and drought on spring maize (Zea mays L.). Pak. J. Bot. 2021, 53, 731–739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Murugesan, B.; Karuppannan, S.; Mengistie, A.T.; Ranganathan, M.; Gopalakrishnan, G. Distribution and Trend Analysis of COVID-19 in India: Geospatial Approach. J. Geo. Stud. 2020, 4, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  74. Štreimikienė, D.; Baležentis, T.; Volkov, A.; Ribašauskienė, E.; Morkūnas, M.; Žičkienė, A. Negative effects of covid-19 pandemic on agriculture: Systematic literature review in the frameworks of vulnerability, resilience and risks involved. Econ. Res.-Ekon. Istraž. 2022, 35, 529–545. [Google Scholar]
  75. Naz, S.; Fatima, Z.; Iqbal, P.; Khan, A.; Zakir, I.; Ullah, H.; Ahmad, S. An Introduction to Climate Change Phenomenon. In Building Climate Resilience in Agriculture; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 3–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  76. Rahman, M.T.; Akter, S.; Rana, M.R.; Sabuz, A.A.; Jubayer, M.F. How COVID-19 pandemic is affecting achieved food security in Bangladesh: A perspective with required policy interventions. J. Agri. Food Res. 2022, 7, 100258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  77. Rubin, G.D.; Ryerson, C.J.; Haramati, L.B.; Sverzellati, N.; Kanne, J.P.; Raoof, S.; Anderson, D.J. The role of chest imaging in patient management during the COVID-19 pandemic: A multinational consensus statement from the Fleischner Society. Chest 2020, 296, 172–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  78. Sabagh, A.E.; Hossain, A.; Islam, M.S.; Iqbal, M.A.; Fahad, S.; Ratnasekera, D.; Llanes, A. Consequences and Mitigation Strategies of Heat Stress for Sustainability of Soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.) Production Under the Changing Climate; Plant Stress Physiology; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  79. Sarkar, A.; Hongyu, W.; Jony, A.A.; Das, J.C.; Memon, W.H.; Qian, L. Evaluation of the determinants of food security within the COVID-19 pandemic circumstances-a particular case of Shaanxi, China. Glob. Health Res. Policy 2021, 6, 45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  80. Seleiman, M.F.; Selim, S.; Alhammad, B.A.; Alharbi, B.M.; Juliatti, F.C. Will novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic impact agriculture, food security and animal sectors? Biosci. J. 2020, 36, 1315–1326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  81. Laborde, D.; Martin, W.; Swinnen, J.; Vos, R. COVID-19 risks to global food security. Science 2020, 369, 500–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  82. Workie, E.; Mackolil, J.; Nyika, J.; Ramadas, S. Deciphering the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on food security, agriculture, and livelihoods: A review of the evidence from developing countries. Curr. Res. Environ. Sustain. 2020, 2, 100014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  83. Hussain, S.; Mubeen, M.; Ahmad, A.; Fahad, S.; Nasim, W.; Hammad, H.M.; Parveen, S. Using space–time scan statistic for studying the effects of COVID-19 in Punjab, Pakistan: A guideline for policy measures in regional agriculture. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 30, 42495–42508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  84. Suresh, V.; Fishman, R.; von Lieres, J.S.; Rao, B.R. Impact of the COVID-19 lockdown on the economic situation and food security of rural households in India. J. Agribus. Dev. Emerg. Econ. 2022, 12, 491–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  85. Zhang, W.; Persoz, L.; Hakiza, S.; Biru, L.; Girmatsion, L. Impact of COVID-19 on Food Security in Ethiopia. Epidemiologia 2022, 3, 161–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  86. Kafi, A.; Zainuddin, N.; Saifudin, A.M.; Shahron, S.A.; Razalli, M.R.; Musa, S.; Ahmi, A. Meta-analysis of food supply chain: Pre, during and post COVID-19 pandemic. Agric. Food Secur. 2023, 12, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  87. Hammad, H.M.; Nauman, H.M.F.; Abbas, F.; Jawad, R.; Farhad, W.; Shahid, M.; Cerda, A. Impacts of COVID-19 pandemic on environment, society, and food security. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2023, 30, 99261–99272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  88. Haji, M.; Himpel, F. Building resilience in food security: Sustainable strategies post-COVID-19. Sustainability 2024, 16, 995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  89. Shammi, M.; Bodrud-Doza, M.; Islam, A.R.M.T.; Rahman, M.M. Strategic assessment of COVID-19 pandemic in Bangladesh: Comparative lockdown scenario analysis, public perception, and management for sustainability. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2020, 23, 6148–6191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  90. Shupler, M.; Mwitari, J.; Gohole, A.; de Cuevas, R.A.; Puzzolo, E.; Čukić, I.; Pope, D. COVID-19 impacts on household energy & food security in a Kenyan informal settlement: The need for integrated approaches to the SDGs. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 144, 111018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  91. Simpson, S.; Kay, F.U.; Abbara, S.; Bhalla, S.; Chung, J.H.; Chung, M.; Litt, H. Radiological Society of North America Expert Consensus Statement on Reporting Chest CT Findings Related to COVID-19. Endorsed by the Society of Thoracic Radiology, the American College of Radiology, and RSNA. Radiol. Cardiothorac. Imaging 2020, 2, e200152. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  92. Stephens, E.C.; Martin, G.; van Wijk, M.; Timsina, J.; Snow, V. Impacts of COVID-19 on agricultural and food systems worldwide and on progress to the sustainable development goals. Agric. Syst. 2020, 183, 102873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  93. WFP (World Food Program). Global Report on Food Crises. 2020. Available online: https://www.wfp.org/publications/2020-global-report-food-crises (accessed on 25 August 2021).
  94. Yao, H.; Zang, C.; Zuo, X.; Xian, Y.; Lu, Y.; Huang, Y.; Li, X. Tradeoff analysis of the pork supply and food security under the influence of African swine fever and the COVID-19 outbreak in China. Geogr. Sustain. 2022, 3, 32–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  95. Yazdanpanah, M.; Tajeri Moghadam, M.; Savari, M.; Zobeidi, T.; Sieber, S.; Löhr, K. The impact of livelihood assets on the food security of farmers in Southern Iran during the COVID-19 pandemic. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 5310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  96. Zhu, N.; Zhang, D.; Wang, W.; Li, X.; Yang, B.; Song, J.; Zhao, X.; Huang, B.; Shi, W.; Lu, R.; et al. A novel coronavirus from patients with pneumonia in China, 2019. N. Eng. J. Medi. 2020, 382, 727–733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  97. Okolie, C.C.; Ogundeji, A.A. Effect of COVID-19 on agricultural production and food security: A scientometric analysis. Humanit. Soc. Sci. Commun. 2022, 9, 64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  98. Abu Hatab, A.; Krautscheid, L.; Boqvist, S. COVID-19, livestock systems and food security in developing countries: A systematic review of an emerging literature. Pathogens 2021, 10, 586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  99. Alam, G.M.; Khatun, M.N. Impact of COVID-19 on vegetable supply chain and food security: Empirical evidence from Bangladesh. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0248120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  100. Éliás, B.A.; Jámbor, A. Food security and COVID-19: A systematic review of the first-year experience. Sustainability 2021, 13, 5294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  101. Wannaprasert, P.; Choenkwan, S. Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on ginger production: Supply chains, labor, and food security in Northeast Thailand. For. Soc. 2021, 5, 120–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  102. Siche, R. What is the impact of COVID-19 disease on agriculture? Sci. Agropecu. 2020, 11, 3–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  103. Latif, A. Pakistan to Ease Lockdown Amid COVID-19. 2020. Available online: https://www.aa.com.tr/en/asia-pacific/pakistan-to-ease-lockdown-amid-covid-19/1829390 (accessed on 15 March 2021).
  104. Nekmahmud, M. Food consumption behavior, food supply chain disruption, and food security crisis during the COVID-19: The mediating effect of food price and food stress. J. Foodserv. Bus. Res. 2024, 27, 227–253. [Google Scholar]
  105. Kumar, R.; Ganapathy, L.; Gokhale, R.; Kumar, M.; Tiwari, M.K. Managing COVID-19 food supply chain disruptions in India: A case study of public distribution system. Inter. J. Logist. Res. App. 2025, 28, 1454–1475. [Google Scholar]
  106. Weiler, A.M.; Grez, E.E. Rotten asparagus and just-in-time workers: Canadian agricultural industry framing of farm labour and food security during the COVID-19 pandemic. Can. Food Stud. Rev. Can. Des. études Sur L’alimentation 2022, 9, 38–52. [Google Scholar]
  107. Zhong, T.; Crush, J.; Si, Z.; Scott, S. Emergency food supplies and food security in Wuhan and Nanjing, China, during the COVID-19 pandemic: Evidence from a field survey. Dev. Policy Rev. 2022, 40, e12575. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  108. Zhu, X.; Yuan, X.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, H.; Wang, J.; Sun, B. The global concern of food security during the COVID-19 pandemic: Impacts and perspectives on food security. Food Chem. 2022, 370, 130830. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  109. Ceballos, F.; Hernandez, M.A.; Paz, C. Short-term impacts of COVID-19 on food security and nutrition in rural Guatemala: Phone-based farm household survey evidence. Agric. Econ. 2021, 52, 477–494. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  110. Ceballos, F.; Kannan, S.; Kramer, B. Crop prices, farm incomes, and food security during the COVID-19 pandemic in India: Phone-based producer survey evidence from Haryana State. Agric. Econ. 2021, 52, 525–542. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  111. Deaton, B.J.; Deaton, B.J. Food security and Canada’s agricultural system challenged by COVID-19: One year later. Can. J. Agric. Econ. Rev. Can. D’agroeconomie 2021, 69, 161–166. [Google Scholar]
  112. Joshi, S.; Sharma, M. Digital technologies (DT) adoption in agri-food supply chains amidst COVID-19: An approach towards food security concerns in developing countries. J. Glob. Oper. Strateg. Sourc. 2021, 15, 262–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  113. Hussain, S.; Sajjad, A.; Mubeen, M.; Karuppannan, S. Remote Sensing for Agricultural Water Management. In Innovations in Agricultural Water Management; Mubeen, M., Jatoi, W.N., Hashmi, M.Z., Ahmad, M., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  114. Xu, Z.; Elomri, A.; El Omri, A.; Kerbache, L.; Liu, H. The compounded effects of COVID-19 pandemic and desert locust outbreak on food security and food supply chain. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  115. Béné, C. Resilience of local food systems and links to food security—A review of some important concepts in the context of COVID-19 and other shocks. Food Secur. 2020, 12, 805–822. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  116. Deaton, B.J.; Deaton, B.J. Food security and Canada’s agricultural system challenged by COVID-19. Can. J. Agric. Econ. Rev. Can. D’agroeconomie 2020, 68, 143–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  117. Devereux, S.; Béné, C.; Hoddinott, J. Conceptualising COVID-19’s impacts on household food security. Food Secur. 2020, 12, 769–772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  118. Galanakis, C.M. The Food Systems in the Era of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic Crisis. Foods 2020, 9, 523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  119. Hafiz, H.; Oei, S.Y.; Ring, D.M.; Shnitser, N. Regulating in Pandemic: Evaluating Economic and Financial Policy Responses to the Coronavirus Crisis. Boston Coll. Law. Sch. Leg. Stud. Res. Pap. 2020, 527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  120. Kumar, A.; Padhee, A.K.; Kumar, S. How Indian agriculture should change after COVID-19. Food Secur. 2020, 12, 837–840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  121. Lakhani, A. Which Melbourne metropolitan areas are vulnerable to COVID-19 based on age, disability and access to health services? Using spatial analysis to identify service gaps and inform delivery. J. Pain Symptom Manag. 2020, 60, e41–e44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  122. Lal, R. Home gardening and urban agriculture for advancing food and nutritional security in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Food Secur. 2020, 12, 871–876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  123. Lugo-Morin, D.R. Global Food Security in a Pandemic: The Case of the New Coronavirus (COVID-19). World 2020, 1, 171–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  124. Mollalo, A.; Vahedi, B.; Rivera, K.M. GIS-based spatial modeling of COVID-19 incidence rate in the continental United States. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 728, 138884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  125. Sarfo, A.K.; Shankar, K. Application of geospatial technologies in the COVID-19 fight of Ghana. Trans. Indian Nat. Acad. Eng. 2020, 5, 193–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  126. Laborde, D.; Martin, W.; Vos, R. Impacts of COVID-19 on global poverty, food security, and diets: Insights from global model scenario analysis. Agric. Econ. 2021, 52, 375–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  127. Swinnen, J.; Vos, R. COVID-19 and impacts on global food systems and household welfare: Introduction to a special issue. Agric. Econ. 2021, 52, 365–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  128. Barrett, C.B.; Reardon, T.; Swinnen, J.; Zilberman, D. Agri-food value chain revolutions in low- and middle-income countries. J. Econ. Lit. 2022, 60, 1316–1377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  129. Aday, S.; Aday, M.S. Impact of COVID-19 on the food supply chain. Food Qual. Saf. 2020, 4, 167–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  130. Elleby, C.; Pérez Domínguez, I.; Adenauer, M.; Genovese, G. Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the global agricultural markets. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2020, 76, 1067–1079. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
Covid 06 00104 g001
Figure 1. PRISMA-based systematic screening and selection process.
Figure 1. PRISMA-based systematic screening and selection process.
Covid 06 00104 g001
Covid 06 00104 g002
Figure 2. Word cloud diagram including the main keywords.
Figure 2. Word cloud diagram including the main keywords.
Covid 06 00104 g002
Covid 06 00104 g003
Figure 3. Farmer responses to the effects of COVID-19 on field crops and vegetables [61].
Figure 3. Farmer responses to the effects of COVID-19 on field crops and vegetables [61].
Covid 06 00104 g003
Covid 06 00104 g004
Figure 4. COVID-19’s impact on the food supply chain.
Figure 4. COVID-19’s impact on the food supply chain.
Covid 06 00104 g004
Table 1. Main findings of previous studies related to COVID-19 and agriculture.
Table 1. Main findings of previous studies related to COVID-19 and agriculture.
No.ReferencesMain Finding
1Gray [43]Due to the increase in food prices, various countries are increasing special labor to keep agriculture securely running as a dynamic business.
2Jamal [44]Almost 70% of respondents depend on farm laborers, who face low income in Pakistan during the harvesting period during the lockdown.
3Adhikari et al. [45]Almost 22% of agriculture-related daily wage laborers and 25% of non-agriculture daily wage laborers stated to have reduced their income in Nepal.
4Rad et al. [46]COVID-19 has harmed agriculture, the economy, and food production, corresponding to a 30% reduction in purchasing power parity in 2020.
5Murdad et al. [47]A total of 95% of farmers from a survey stated that COVID-19 disturbed the economy, public health, agricultural sector, and daily life in Malaysia.
6Popescu & Popescu [48]Their survey results indicated that 45.9% of agricultural work was affected due to the COVID-19 pandemic in Romania.
7Rogito & Rogito [49]The study examines the important role of different stakeholders in addressing the impact of the COVID-19 lockdown in Africa.
8Wei et al. [50]Agricultural trade decreased by 10.15% (2019–2020) during COVID-19 and rebounded by 11.45% in 2021.
Table 2. Main findings of previous studies related to food security and COVID-19.
Table 2. Main findings of previous studies related to food security and COVID-19.
No.ReferencesMain Finding
1Laborde et al. [81]During the lockdowns, the most vulnerable food production dimension and economic access are affecting the world.
2Workie et al. [82]Food security and agronomy of developing countries highlighted the impact of COVID-19, which can be judged using scale data analysis.
3Hussain et al. [83]Almost 72% of farmers detected an increase in the price of food during the lockdown, although 28% of farmers stated that the price of food had not changed during COVID-19.
4Murdad et al. [47]The increase in living costs is due to increasing food costs, distribution, and processing in Malaysia.
5Suresh et al. [84]The price of staple foods has increased by 25 to 30% from April to July 2020 in India during the COVID-19 lockdown.
6Zhang et al. [85]The COVID-19 lockdown has harmfully impacted households, food security, and supplies in Ethiopia.
7Kafi et al. [86]Food supply chain research publications increased significantly after 2020, showing major concern regarding resilience and recovery.
8Hammad et al. [87]COVID-19 severely affected global agriculture and food systems by increasing food prices by nearly 20%, reducing farmers’ market access, and threatening agricultural sustainability, especially in developing countries.
9Haji et al. [88]Nearly 3 billion people were unable to afford a healthy diet during and after COVID-19.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Hussain, S.; Mubeen, M.; Qaisrani, S.A.; Fahad, S.; Suffian, M.; Tahir, M.; Javeed, H.M.R.; Nasim, W. COVID-19 and Global Agriculture: Impacts on Food Security, Supply Chains and Agricultural Resilience. COVID 2026, 6, 104. https://doi.org/10.3390/covid6060104

AMA Style

Hussain S, Mubeen M, Qaisrani SA, Fahad S, Suffian M, Tahir M, Javeed HMR, Nasim W. COVID-19 and Global Agriculture: Impacts on Food Security, Supply Chains and Agricultural Resilience. COVID. 2026; 6(6):104. https://doi.org/10.3390/covid6060104

Chicago/Turabian Style

Hussain, Sajjad, Muhammad Mubeen, Saeed Ahmad Qaisrani, Shah Fahad, Muhammad Suffian, Muhammad Tahir, Hafiz Muhammad Rashad Javeed, and Wajid Nasim. 2026. "COVID-19 and Global Agriculture: Impacts on Food Security, Supply Chains and Agricultural Resilience" COVID 6, no. 6: 104. https://doi.org/10.3390/covid6060104

APA Style

Hussain, S., Mubeen, M., Qaisrani, S. A., Fahad, S., Suffian, M., Tahir, M., Javeed, H. M. R., & Nasim, W. (2026). COVID-19 and Global Agriculture: Impacts on Food Security, Supply Chains and Agricultural Resilience. COVID, 6(6), 104. https://doi.org/10.3390/covid6060104

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop